<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
Coop et. al.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for your detailed reply. <BR>
<BR>
See info at bottom about child maltreatment deaths in the USA compared to other nations.<BR>
<BR>
My post was loosely aimed at exposing contradictions between various moral positions our culture takes regarding protection of the "innocent," especially children. <BR>
<BR>
I mentioned the USA's stand on allowing the execution of those committing crimes as minors, executions only approved in a small number of nations some would regard as poor examples of governments who support human rights, yet there the USA is keeping company with those governments regarding minors and this stand on the death penalty. <BR>
<BR>
I did not mean to suggest that those who "shrug" at the deaths of innocents in Afghanistan and Iraq approve of these deaths, but that they are morally willing to accept them for the good (sic) that ostensibly will result from our military action in these nations. But then some of these same people will not support programs to help children in the USA, or will denounce in absolute moral terms difficult choices regarding abortion. Maybe there is way to eliminate the moral contradictions suggested, but to accept the killing and maiming of huge numbers of innocents and children in a foreign country, blocking aid to children here, and then trying to stop all abortion because of the ultimate value of protecting all life, even of the unborn, does suggest some serious moral inconsistencies.<BR>
<BR>
It appears you agree somewhat with the thesis that the militarization of the USA does have consequences regarding our rates of domestic violence.<BR>
<BR>
Anyway, the facts are clear that the USA is not a nation that puts the welfare of children at the top of its list of priorities. The USA is way down the list of nations in terms of the overall well being and safety of children within its borders.<BR>
<BR>
So while many pat themselves on the backs for the USA being a moral and righteous leader of nations regarding our treatment of "innocent" people, e.g., children, the facts tell a different story.<BR>
<BR>
It is clear that I am aiming my comments at current "culture wars" here in the USA.<BR>
<BR>
And on that note, here are some facts for consideration:<BR>
<BR>
More children (under the age of 15) die every year from maltreatment in the world's richest nations than the total number killed in the 9/11 attacks. The USA has rates 10-15 times higher than the nations at the top of the list of rich nations regarding child deaths from maltreatment:<BR>
<BR>
>From the UNICEF web site:<BR>
<BR>
<B>Report Card five: A League Table of Child Maltreatment Deaths in Rich Nations<BR>
<BR>
</B>The fifth <A HREF="http://www.unicef-icdc.org/cgi-bin/unicef/main.sql?menu=/publications/menu.html&testo=Lunga.sql?ProductID=353">Report Card</A> represents the first ever attempt to draw a comparative picture of the physical abuse of children in the 27 richest nations of the world. UNICEF research estimates that almost 3,500 children under the age of 15 die from physical abuse and neglect every year in the industrialized world. The greatest risk is among younger children. A small group of countries - Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland and Norway - appear to have an exceptionally low incidence of child maltreatment deaths; Belgium, the Czech Republic, New Zealand, Hungary and France have levels that are four to six times higher. The United States, Mexico and Portugal have rates that are between 10 and 15 times higher than those at the top of the league table. The good news is that child deaths from maltreatment appear to be declining in the great majority of industrialized countries. <BR>
<BR>
<A HREF="http://www.unicef-icdc.org/research/ESP/CIIC1.html">http://www.unicef-icdc.org/research/ESP/CIIC1.html</A><BR>
<BR>
--------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
V2020 Post by Ted Moffett<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>